Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Change can be relational rather than intrinsic: a being changes if its relations to temporal things alter, even without internal succession.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Relational change presupposes something genuinely changing relations—but if nothing intrinsically alters, the ground of relation-change remains obscure.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
We intuitively distinguish real change (water freezing) from apparent change (turning to see an object). Relational change alone collapses this distinction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If relational change requires no internal succession, a completely frozen, static universe would be indistinguishable from one with constant flux.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
A statue's relation to observers changes as they move around it, revealing new appearances without the statue's intrinsic properties altering.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Time itself may be fundamentally relational rather than absolute, making relational change primary and intrinsic change derivative.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Eternalism (block universe) entails that past and future exist equally; an object's relation to 'now' shifts without internal succession.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.